public inbox for linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org
 help / color / mirror / Atom feed
From: Jack Steiner <steiner@sgi.com>
To: "Chen, Kenneth W" <kenneth.w.chen@intel.com>
Cc: hawkes@sgi.com, Tony Luck <tony.luck@gmail.com>,
	Andrew Morton <akpm@osdl.org>,
	linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org, linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org,
	Robin Holt <holt@sgi.com>, Dimitri Sivanich <sivanich@sgi.com>,
	Jes Sorensen <jes@sgi.com>
Subject: Re: [PATCH] ia64: simplify and fix udelay()
Date: Wed, 15 Feb 2006 09:08:23 -0600	[thread overview]
Message-ID: <20060215150823.GA27208@sgi.com> (raw)
In-Reply-To: <200602150908.k1F98dg02934@unix-os.sc.intel.com>

On Wed, Feb 15, 2006 at 01:08:41AM -0800, Chen, Kenneth W wrote:
> hawkes@sgi.com wrote on Tuesday, February 14, 2006 10:40 AM
> > a preemption and migration to another CPU during the
> > while-loop
> 
> Off topic from the subject line a bit, but related: how many Altix
> SN2 customers in the field turn on CONFIG_PREEMPT? Redhat EL4 doesn't
> turn on preempt, SuSE SLES9 and SLES10 beta don't turn it on either.
> Is there a real benefit of turning that option on for SN2?

AFAICT, no one at SGI uses or plans to use CONFIG_PREEMPT. Most of
our customers use kernels from one of the distros & none at this point
enables preemption. 

The realtime folks here have experimented with CONFIG_PREEMPT but so
far have not seen any significant benefit.

Regardless, we should fix udelay() to handle unsync'ed ITCs.  It would
be nice to have it working.



-- Jack


  parent reply	other threads:[~2006-02-15 15:08 UTC|newest]

Thread overview: 6+ messages / expand[flat|nested]  mbox.gz  Atom feed  top
2006-02-14 18:40 [PATCH] ia64: simplify and fix udelay() hawkes
2006-02-15  9:08 ` Chen, Kenneth W
2006-02-15 14:56   ` Jes Sorensen
2006-02-15 15:08   ` Jack Steiner [this message]
  -- strict thread matches above, loose matches on Subject: below --
2006-02-13 18:33 hawkes
2006-02-13 21:28 ` Andreas Schwab

Reply instructions:

You may reply publicly to this message via plain-text email
using any one of the following methods:

* Save the following mbox file, import it into your mail client,
  and reply-to-all from there: mbox

  Avoid top-posting and favor interleaved quoting:
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Posting_style#Interleaved_style

* Reply using the --to, --cc, and --in-reply-to
  switches of git-send-email(1):

  git send-email \
    --in-reply-to=20060215150823.GA27208@sgi.com \
    --to=steiner@sgi.com \
    --cc=akpm@osdl.org \
    --cc=hawkes@sgi.com \
    --cc=holt@sgi.com \
    --cc=jes@sgi.com \
    --cc=kenneth.w.chen@intel.com \
    --cc=linux-ia64@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=linux-kernel@vger.kernel.org \
    --cc=sivanich@sgi.com \
    --cc=tony.luck@gmail.com \
    /path/to/YOUR_REPLY

  https://kernel.org/pub/software/scm/git/docs/git-send-email.html

* If your mail client supports setting the In-Reply-To header
  via mailto: links, try the mailto: link
Be sure your reply has a Subject: header at the top and a blank line before the message body.
This is a public inbox, see mirroring instructions
for how to clone and mirror all data and code used for this inbox